Re: IBM joins the OpenOffice.org community - Linux

This is a discussion on Re: IBM joins the OpenOffice.org community - Linux ; Linonut wrote: > After takin' a swig o' grog, Gregory Shearman belched out this bit o' > wisdom: > >> DFS wrote: >>> >>> Of course it was stupid and broken: it's from an open source product - >>> the ...

+ Reply to Thread
Results 1 to 10 of 10

Thread: Re: IBM joins the OpenOffice.org community

  1. Re: IBM joins the OpenOffice.org community

    Linonut wrote:

    > After takin' a swig o' grog, Gregory Shearman belched out this bit o'
    > wisdom:
    >
    >> DFS wrote:
    >>>
    >>> Of course it was stupid and broken: it's from an open source product -
    >>> the
    >>> result of inferior skills, testing and accountability. The punchline:
    >>> it's literally the simplest macro that can be used - sum a column of
    >>> numbers. Yet OO can't do it.

    >
    > Sure it can.
    >
    >> I've never liked Starbasic. I never use it. I do use calc occasionally
    >> and it has always been easy to do what I want.

    >
    > It sounds like another of DFS's jumping-the-gun about a "missing"
    > OpenOffice feature.


    Yeah... he's a miserable son-of-a-gun.

    I didn't attempt to **** about with StarBasic to prove him wrong.. I don't
    like it and don't use it.

    >>> I hear ya! What kind of idiot would want to write programs to automate
    >>> repetitive spreadsheet tasks? Who would code a macro routine to import
    >>> data from 100 spreadsheets, when they could open each one individually
    >>> and
    >>> manually cut and paste the data? And I don't know about you, but the
    >>> way OO handled that simple macro gives me tons of confidence in it.

    >>
    >> Then use Excel.. I don't care. No one is forcing you.

    >
    > Besides, even if OpenOffice fell short, you could write some perl code
    > to do the job directly on the XML. That's the beauty of an open format.


    Yep... but that's too hard for a miserable geek whose only task on this
    world is to be a DB slave to a huge corporation.

    --
    Regards,

    Gregory.
    Gentoo Linux - Penguin Power

  2. Re: IBM joins the OpenOffice.org community

    Gregory Shearman wrote:

    > Yeah... he's a miserable son-of-a-gun.


    I'm not miserable in real-life. cola liars just bring out the worst in me,
    and I feel compelled to shut them down.



    > I didn't attempt to **** about with StarBasic to prove him wrong.


    You *can't* prove me wrong about that macro. You could rewrite it, but
    that's not the issue.



    > I don't like it and don't use it.


    I don't blame you.

    Here's the recorded Excel 2000 macro which achieves flawlessly in 1 line
    what the OO.o slop requires 27 lines to fail at, which is to sum the 3 cells
    above the current cell:

    ActiveCell.FormulaR1C1 = "=SUM(R[-3]C:R[-1]C)"




    > Yep... but that's too hard for a miserable geek whose only task on
    > this world is to be a DB slave to a huge corporation.


    What else would I be a [willing] db slave to?




  3. Re: IBM joins the OpenOffice.org community

    After takin' a swig o' grog, DFS belched out this bit o' wisdom:

    > Here's the recorded Excel 2000 macro which achieves flawlessly in 1 line
    > what the OO.o slop requires 27 lines to fail at, which is to sum the 3 cells
    > above the current cell:
    >
    > ActiveCell.FormulaR1C1 = "=SUM(R[-3]C:R[-1]C)"


    That isn't a macro. That is a function call. These are macros:

    http://www.ooomacros.org/user.php

    Show us the money. Show us the OO macro you think is needed to achieve
    the same.

    --
    Tux rox!

  4. Re: IBM joins the OpenOffice.org community

    In comp.os.linux.advocacy, Linonut

    wrote
    on Thu, 13 Sep 2007 18:11:50 GMT
    :
    > After takin' a swig o' grog, DFS belched out this bit o' wisdom:
    >
    >> Here's the recorded Excel 2000 macro which achieves flawlessly in 1 line
    >> what the OO.o slop requires 27 lines to fail at, which is to sum the 3 cells
    >> above the current cell:
    >>
    >> ActiveCell.FormulaR1C1 = "=SUM(R[-3]C:R[-1]C)"

    >
    > That isn't a macro. That is a function call. These are macros:
    >
    > http://www.ooomacros.org/user.php
    >
    > Show us the money. Show us the OO macro you think is needed to achieve
    > the same.
    >


    I'm curious as well. Presumably, this is a Visual Basic
    script bit that among other things contains ActiveCell as
    a local variable containing a COM object.

    How does one get that variable?

    --
    #191, ewill3@earthlink.net
    /dev/signature: Resource temporarily unavailable

    --
    Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com


  5. Re: IBM joins the OpenOffice.org community

    DFS wrote:

    > Gregory Shearman wrote:
    >
    >> Yeah... he's a miserable son-of-a-gun.

    >
    > I'm not miserable in real-life. cola liars just bring out the worst in
    > me, and I feel compelled to shut them down.


    Why bother? You spend your time here venting your spleen. Is it therapy or
    something?

    >> I didn't attempt to **** about with StarBasic to prove him wrong.

    >
    > You *can't* prove me wrong about that macro. You could rewrite it, but
    > that's not the issue.


    Huh? You might have missed a function that does what you want without all
    the kicking and screaming. Your expertise is obviously (you say) using
    Excel. Can you claim the same expertise in Calc? I have expertise in
    neither. I use spreadsheets but not often. They are good for doing my
    finances... but I don't use them for work. I don't find a lot of difference
    in them because I don't use them enough to get into all the esoteric,
    arcane parts of the respective software.

    >> I don't like it and don't use it.

    >
    > I don't blame you.


    It's a leftover from the original Staroffice. It's horrible and it is
    clunky.

    > Here's the recorded Excel 2000 macro which achieves flawlessly in 1 line
    > what the OO.o slop requires 27 lines to fail at, which is to sum the 3
    > cells above the current cell:
    >
    > ActiveCell.FormulaR1C1 = "=SUM(R[-3]C:R[-1]C)"


    I don't think you have the expertise in calc to make this statement.

    >> Yep... but that's too hard for a miserable geek whose only task on
    >> this world is to be a DB slave to a huge corporation.

    >
    > What else would I be a [willing] db slave to?


    Why be a slave?

    --
    Regards,

    Gregory.
    Gentoo Linux - Penguin Power

  6. Re: IBM joins the OpenOffice.org community

    After takin' a swig o' grog, The Ghost In The Machine belched out this bit o' wisdom:

    > In comp.os.linux.advocacy, Linonut
    >
    > wrote
    > on Thu, 13 Sep 2007 18:11:50 GMT
    > :
    >> After takin' a swig o' grog, DFS belched out this bit o' wisdom:
    >>
    >>> Here's the recorded Excel 2000 macro which achieves flawlessly in 1 line
    >>> what the OO.o slop requires 27 lines to fail at, which is to sum the 3 cells
    >>> above the current cell:
    >>>
    >>> ActiveCell.FormulaR1C1 = "=SUM(R[-3]C:R[-1]C)"

    >>
    >> That isn't a macro. That is a function call. These are macros:
    >>
    >> http://www.ooomacros.org/user.php
    >>
    >> Show us the money. Show us the OO macro you think is needed to achieve
    >> the same.

    >
    > I'm curious as well. Presumably, this is a Visual Basic
    > script bit that among other things contains ActiveCell as
    > a local variable containing a COM object.
    >
    > How does one get that variable?


    I sure don't know, but that ability has to exist in Calc.

    What I'm not so sure of is the array-style offset references DFS shows
    above. I didn't see anything in my brief search.

    However, that seems like an idea that should have been implement a
    couple decades ago.

    --
    Tux rox!

  7. Re: IBM joins the OpenOffice.org community

    Gregory Shearman wrote:
    > DFS wrote:
    >
    >> Gregory Shearman wrote:
    >>
    >>> Yeah... he's a miserable son-of-a-gun.

    >>
    >> I'm not miserable in real-life. cola liars just bring out the worst
    >> in me, and I feel compelled to shut them down.

    >
    > Why bother? You spend your time here venting your spleen. Is it
    > therapy or something?


    Entertainment, of sorts.



    > Huh? You might have missed a function that does what you want without
    > all the kicking and screaming.


    The point that you're missing is the OO macro I first posted was recorded by
    OO, and the corresponding Excel macro was recorded by Excel. I used the
    identical keystrokes to record them: =SUM,open paren,arrow up,Shift(to
    anchor the range),arrow up, arrow up, close paren, Enter.

    From that sequence of keystrokes, OO recorded 27 lines and the result fails,
    Excel recorded 1 line and the result succeeds.

    Moral: Windows is 27x better than open source - at least.



    > It's a leftover from the original Staroffice. It's horrible and it is
    > clunky.


    Now you see how I feel about so much open source junkware.



    >> Here's the recorded Excel 2000 macro which achieves flawlessly in 1
    >> line what the OO.o slop requires 27 lines to fail at, which is to
    >> sum the 3 cells above the current cell:
    >>
    >> ActiveCell.FormulaR1C1 = "=SUM(R[-3]C:R[-1]C)"

    >
    > I don't think you have the expertise in calc to make this statement.


    That statement can't be used in Calc.




    >>> Yep... but that's too hard for a miserable geek whose only task on
    >>> this world is to be a DB slave to a huge corporation.

    >>
    >> What else would I be a [willing] db slave to?

    >
    > Why be a slave?


    Why be broke and jobless?




  8. Re: IBM joins the OpenOffice.org community

    "DFS" writes:

    > Gregory Shearman wrote:
    >> DFS wrote:
    >>

    > From that sequence of keystrokes, OO recorded 27 lines and the result fails,
    > Excel recorded 1 line and the result succeeds.
    >
    > Moral: Windows is 27x better than open source - at least.
    >
    >
    >
    >> It's a leftover from the original Staroffice. It's horrible and it is
    >> clunky.

    >
    > Now you see how I feel about so much open source junkware.
    >
    >


    And this is WHY someone like Torwalds is so important to the kernel. He
    will not let **** remain or get merged in because the "branch"
    maintainer was incompetent or lazy. In too many OSS apps it's a quick
    branch, a half assed merge and then vanish. Result? No
    accountability. Good projects with good PMs avoid this of course. But
    how many are well run? You still can't beat sitting down in an office
    with a white board.

  9. Re: IBM joins the OpenOffice.org community

    DFS wrote:

    > Gregory Shearman wrote:
    >> DFS wrote:



    >> Huh? You might have missed a function that does what you want without
    >> all the kicking and screaming.

    >
    > The point that you're missing is the OO macro I first posted was recorded
    > by
    > OO, and the corresponding Excel macro was recorded by Excel. I used the
    > identical keystrokes to record them: =SUM,open paren,arrow up,Shift(to
    > anchor the range),arrow up, arrow up, close paren, Enter.
    >
    > From that sequence of keystrokes, OO recorded 27 lines and the result
    > fails, Excel recorded 1 line and the result succeeds.
    >
    > Moral: Windows is 27x better than open source - at least.


    Moral: You know Excel and don't know Calc

    You used identical keystrokes?

    So you expect Calc to be identical to Excel?

    It isn't... big deal... just stick to Excel.

    >> It's a leftover from the original Staroffice. It's horrible and it is
    >> clunky.

    >
    > Now you see how I feel about so much open source junkware.


    Staroffice was CLOSED source junkware. StarBasic came from Staroffice.

    >>>> Yep... but that's too hard for a miserable geek whose only task on
    >>>> this world is to be a DB slave to a huge corporation.
    >>>
    >>> What else would I be a [willing] db slave to?

    >>
    >> Why be a slave?

    >
    > Why be broke and jobless?


    How miserable... you are either a slave or you're broke and jobless. No
    wonder all you do is whine....

    --
    Regards,

    Gregory.
    Gentoo Linux - Penguin Power

  10. Re: IBM joins the OpenOffice.org community

    Gregory Shearman wrote:
    > DFS wrote:
    >
    >> Gregory Shearman wrote:
    >>> DFS wrote:

    >
    >
    >>> Huh? You might have missed a function that does what you want
    >>> without all the kicking and screaming.

    >>
    >> The point that you're missing is the OO macro I first posted was
    >> recorded by
    >> OO, and the corresponding Excel macro was recorded by Excel. I used
    >> the identical keystrokes to record them: =SUM,open paren,arrow
    >> up,Shift(to anchor the range),arrow up, arrow up, close paren, Enter.
    >>
    >> From that sequence of keystrokes, OO recorded 27 lines and the result
    >> fails, Excel recorded 1 line and the result succeeds.
    >>
    >> Moral: Windows is 27x better than open source - at least.

    >
    > Moral: You know Excel and don't know Calc


    What's to know about it, besides that its macro recorder is broken and
    OOBasic is much clunkier than Excel VBA?




    > You used identical keystrokes?
    >
    > So you expect Calc to be identical to Excel?


    Of course not. But I expect it to just work - you know, the way cola nuts
    say Linux "just works".



    > It isn't... big deal... just stick to Excel.


    I will.



    >>> It's a leftover from the original Staroffice. It's horrible and it
    >>> is clunky.

    >>
    >> Now you see how I feel about so much open source junkware.

    >
    > Staroffice was CLOSED source junkware. StarBasic came from Staroffice.


    uh huh. But for years it's been OPEN source junkware, and they've had
    plenty of time to fix the slop.




    > How miserable... you are either a slave or you're broke and jobless.
    > No wonder all you do is whine....


    I have a job at a corporation and I'm a slave. You have a job at a
    corporation and you're free.




+ Reply to Thread